Category Archives: USA based
By Japan K Pathak
Ahmedabad, DeshGujarat, 17 April 2013
With official documents in hand, in this series I am trying to narrate the details of crorepati non-government organizations functioning in Gujarat – author
The last article was about details of foreign funding to Shabnam Hashmi’s NGO ANHAD. In that article we mentioned that one of the founders of ANHAD was Mr. Harsh Mander, a former IAS officer and Action Aid India man.
According to Wikipedia page, Harsh Mander was a signatory to the campaign to save Afzal Guru, a terrorist convicted and later hanged for the 2001 Indian Parliament attack. Mander also supports the demand for removal of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 from Kashmir and North-eastern states. Harsh is convener of the drafting committee for the Communal Violence (Prevention) bill. Harsh Mander applied for mercy to Pakistani terrorist Ajmal Kasab courting a huge controversy.
Wikipedia page further tells that Harsh became member of National Advisory Council of the UPA government in 2010 and special commissioner to the Supreme Court.He was removed from the NAC in 2012. He worked formerly in the Indian Administrative Service in the predominantly tribal states Madhya Pradesh and Chhatisgarh for almost two decades.
Harsh Mander heads NGO called “Aman Biradari”. He is founder member of Shabnam Hashmi led organization ANHAD.
But this article is about Mr. Mander’s another organization – ‘Centre for Equity Studies’(CES). This is a foreign funded (with partial funding from Christian organizations and church) NGO, headquartered in Delhi. We have obtained two-year data of foreign funding to Mander’s Centre for Equity Studies(CES).
In year 2011-12, CES received Rs 7,55,17,631.25 foreign funding. As per CES’s submission before government’s concerned department, justice for victim in states including Gujarat was one of the cause for which foreign fund was received and utilized. Research and homes for street children were other works for which money was received and spent in Gujarat area.
As Gujarat is involved somewhere, we are covering Harsh’s Delhi headquartered CES in our series.
In 2011, Mr. Mander’s NGO received highest amount of aid from Netherlands based ‘Partnership Foundation’ for “welfare of children”. From online resources we learn that Partnership Foundation was set up by Ferd van Koolwijk, a Dutch businessman, who initiated the Rainbow Home Program in February 2002 for school children at Sister Cyril’s Loreto Day School in Kolkata. Sister Cyril is from Ireland based Christian religious organization – Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Loreto). Harsh Mander is the main partner of Partnership Foundation in New Delhi. Rainbow Home program is for homeless girls upto age of 18. Partnership Foundation has donated crores and crores of rupees to Mr. Mander’s NGO apparently to run Rainbow homes.
Then CES has received nearly Rs 90 lakh are as donation from Denmark based Christian organization DAN Church AID.
Rs 10 lakh received from America based Association for India’s Development(AID). This organization called AID also supports Medha Patkar in her Narmada movement and anti-Delhi Mumbai corridor movement. AID supported the movement to free Binayak Sen who was allegedly connected to Naxals and therefore jailed, but released later. Arvind Kejriwal is AID Saathi. What is AID Saathi? Well, AID recognizes certain activists in India with “Saathi” awards and support them in a manner that allows them freedom to operate without the constraints of a specific time-bound project. The program creates a mutually enriching relationship between AID and the Saathi and entails not only support in the form of a stipend, but also non-monetary involvement and strategic support from AID volunteers.
Germany’s BODO Huetten Foundation which works with children in education sector is another donor. Action Aid India is ofcourse at Mr. Mander’s help. International Development Research Centre – another donor to CES is headquartered in Canada. Members of IDRC’s Board of Governors are appointed by the Government of Canada.
One interesting source of donation is the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited (HSBC) – the bank that was in news for alleged dubious money transfers.
America based Indian Muslim Relief & Charities is another donor of Mander’s NGO. The same Muslim organization helped Shabnam Hashmi’s ANHAD also.
Now let’s move on to year 2010-11 records. Mr. Mander’s NGO CES received foreign funding of Rs 47817508.11 in this year.
Partnership Foundation is of course the top donor. IDRC also there. Then there’s an organization called Sangat which is based in Bradford, UK. American Federation of Muslims of Indian Origin is another donor of CES this year with less than Rs 10 lakh donation.
Then there’s again a Church. One NGO ‘ICCI and Kerkin Actie’ has donated around Rs 70 lakh in a year to Mr. Mander’s NGO for research, seminars and other activities. Kerkin Actie (in Dutch) means Church in Action.
Concluding – in two years Mr. Harsh Mander’s one NGO CES received Rs 123335139.36 fund from abroad. We don’t have any detail about locally sourced funds of CES.
Previous article in this series:Shabnam Hashmi’s ANHAD is majorly Church funded
By Japan K Pathak
Ahmedabad, DeshGujarat, 16 April 2013
With official documents in hand, in this series I am trying to narrate the details of crorepati non-government organizations functioning in Gujarat – author
When I read status updates on left-winger NGO operator Shabnam Hashmi’s foreign tours, when I look at her anti-Modi ad anti-Right campaigns on Facebook, when I learn that she travels in planes, and manage to have a house in Amdavad, when I learn she camped in Gujarat before the assembly elections for weeks and weeks, the questions arise in my mind: how one manage to spend so much without doing job or business like normal people!
But after getting hold of the official documents on foreign funded organizations in India, I have been able to find some answers.
Shabnam Hashmi runs ANHAD (Act Now for Harmony and Democracy) with registered address as 23, Canning Lane (Pandir Ravi Shankar Shukl Lane) in New Delhi.
Her association is described as Cultural, education and social. Yes, the word ‘political’ is not part of the description.
Hashmi’s NGO received Rs. 1,66,10,753.60 foreign fund in year 2011-12 for “strengthening communal harmony and democracy.”
Now let’s do dissection of the foreign fund, Shabnam Hashmi received during that year.
The highest foreign fund was donated by Britain based organization Christian Aid. ANHAD has received around Rs one crore fund in a year from this organization.
Among the other organizations that made donations to Ms. Hashmi’s ANHAD are IMRC (Indian Muslim Relief and Charities) headquartered in Palo Alto California and Church Auxiliary for Social Action(CASA).
Now let’s move on to the figures of year 2010-11.
ANHAD received foreign donation of Rs 1,65,25,433. Christian Aid was again the main donor Google India,with donation in this year worth Rs 84 lakh around.
In both 2011 and 2010 OXFAM was also one of the major donors of ANHAD.
Interestingly Action-Aid India is also one of the major donors of ANHAD. We accessed the funding details of Action-Aid Associations and found that in same year Action Aid was donated Rs 46053800.00 by a single donor – Google India Private Limited for “welfare of other backward class.”
ANHAD was established in March 2003, as a response to 2002 Gujarat riots by Shabnam Hashmi, Marxian historian Prof. K N Panikkar and social activist Harsh Mander. As per its Wiki page, ANHAD plays a major role in Gujarat to fight against human right violations,as well as in the Kashmir Valley.ANHAD is registered as a trust and has six trustees. They are Shabnam Hashmi, K N Panikkar, Harsh Mander, Shubha Mudgal, Kamla Bhasin, Saeed Akhtar Mirza.
From The Rediscovery of India Blog: http://www.sandeepweb.com/author/administrator/
March 5, 2013
The most important thing before we begin is to call things by their proper name. One, our clever-by-half media and secularati have twisted the retraction of Wharton School India Economic Forum’s invitation to Narendra Modi as a “snub.” Two, it was Wharton that had invited Modi. Modi hadn’t sought it out.
Two pithy and succinct commentaries nicely sum up this shameful incident. The first is a tweet by Rajiv Malhotra: “Wharton snub of Modi is meddling in Indian democracy. Like Oxford training East India Co. officers. Except now Indian sepoys are professors.” The second is a blog post by Pamela Geller:
American stalwart institutions giving up our most basic freedom to Islamic supremacists, goons and thugs….The loss of our most basic freedoms without firing a shot is stunning.
Wharton’s fault is not so much as cancelling Modi’s invitation but cancelling it in the face of bullying tactics by a handful of fascist bigots that includes both professors and students. With this, Wharton has accomplished two things together: it has demonstrated that it’s no longer a stalwart institution, and it has violated the spirit of the American First Amendment.
Rajiv Malhotra’s point is closer home, and a deeper examination of the folks and forces who orchestrated the invitation-revocation reveals disturbing things.
The first point is that the Government of India is a sponsor to this event. As we note, the Government hasn’t uttered a single word of condemnation against the band of bigots who got Modi’s invitation revoked. As a Constitutionally-elected (thrice) Chief Minister, it becomes the Government’s responsibility to refuse to kowtow to this ragtag group of muckrakers. Whatever the ruling party’s politics at home, it should realize a basic fact when abroad: it needs to strongly condemn people of other countries who try to dictate who gets invited or whose invite gets cancelled. And when such a thing occurs, it needs to unilaterally withdraw from the event on moral grounds. As we see, it hasn’t done so. Why? The simple answer: the current dispensation doesn’t mind being held hostage to a group of virulent Narendra Modi-haters even if it means India’s image abroad takes a beating.
The longer answer lies precisely in the composition and agenda of these Professor-Sepoys. But first, here’s the Facebook group that lists more than 900 people who wanted—and got—the cancellation of Modi’s invitation. What also unites these folks is the fact a whole lot of them supported mercy petitions for the Indian Parliament attack mastermind Afzal Guru, and the Pakistani terrorist Ajmal Kasab who mowed down innocent Indians in cold blood on 26/11/2008 in Mumbai.
But when we distill this group to get to the key players who assiduously worked towards and pulled off this shameful deed, we get the following key names:
Ania Loomba and Suvir Kaul—Professors of English at University of Pennsylvania, they were two of the three professors who kickstarted this free-speech-violating petition.
Toorjo Ghosh—Assistant Professor of English, the third kickstarter. Here’s how he gloats about the cancellation: “It is the result of the pressure that we were able to bring over the organisers… in the last two days. I am very very proud of Wharton as well as the Penn University.” In other words, he’s proud that Wharton and Penn acquiescence in choking free speech and democracy.
Shabnam Hashmi—No surprises here. Owner of the highly communal NGO named ANHAD, she’s been one of the key players in the Gujarat Riots Cottage Industry, and continues to be highly active in demonizing Narendra Modi.
TV18—A sponsor of the IEF. This is the same group that owns the news channel CNN-IBN, headed by Rajdeep Sardesai, a known Modi-baiter. He was also caught with his pants down in that shameful Cash for Votes scandal of 2008.
Adani Group—Another sponsor, which withdrew after Modi’s invite was cancelled.
Indeed, the name of that Facebook group is very telling of the attitude of these academic fascists and the students and others who supported them: Ban Narendra Modi From Speaking At Wharton. A terminology typically representative of the free-speech-hating Left. Nobody is denying them their right to criticize Modi, yet what is their first response when they hear that Modi is invited to speak at Wharton? BAN him, muzzle free speech, and murder democracy. However, something else also becomes clear when we look at a partial list of participants at the IEF:
Javed Akhtar and his wife, Shabana Azmi
Suresh Prabhu (who dropped out after news of Modi)
All of these except Suresh Prabhu are in one way or the other related either to the ruling Congress party or supportive of its brand of twisted secularism. But it doesn’t end there. Here’s what the note sent out by the IEF Organizing team says:
our goal as a team is to provide a neutral platform to encourage cross pollination of ideas as we all work towards contributing to India’s success…We do not endorse any political views and do not support any specific ideology.
I suppose the neutral and “not endors(ing) any political views” part doesn’t apply to Union Minister Milind Deora.
The strident opposition to Narendra Modi stems from two reasons. The first is the obvious desire to push a Leftist agenda that thrives on India-baiting. The second is the string of successes that Narendra Modi has recently achieved beginning with his third consecutive, thumping electoral victory and his massive show-stealer at the BJP National Council in Delhi yesterday. These have decisively set the stage for a larger role in national politics. Except a few motivated folks, nobody has really been able to dispute his stupendous Gujarat Development Story that has consistently delivered quality governance and economic development. This precisely is the fear of the fascist professors and other fellow travellers: a scenario in which Narendra Modi had spoken at Wharton. There’s little doubt that he’d be the undisputed giant in that assemblage of the aforementioned pygmies who simply cannot think beyond spurious secularism and socialist platitudes. Indeed, that cancellation note explicitly records all these achievements of Modi.
Equally, the fact that the fascist pressure group was led by Left academics is also consistent with their decade-long record of Modi-baiting. It’s both symbolic and symptomatic of the rot that pervades almost all humanities departments in universities worldwide. These Left-infiltrated universities actively discourage critical thinking by substituting reason with theory and rhetoric. Be it the Jaipur Literary Festival or the current disgrace at Wharton, we see the same or familiar faces. What business does Javed Akhtar and Shabana Azmi have in a Business School? And why were they even invited? Which exposes—yet again—another facet common to events where the Left is involved: preying on taxpayer money.
But what’s clear is this: Wharton and indeed, UPenn itself has scored a massive self-goal by giving in to these Left Professors’ bullying tactics. A goldmine of a sponsor like Adani has pulled out. The former Union Minister, Suresh Prabhu has pulled out. And they haven’t taken this lightly. The social media world began to slam Wharton almost as soon as news of the invite cancellation was reported, and the slamming torrent hasn’t abated. More importantly, Narendra Modi doesn’t need Wharton.
We end this with a self-explanatory and highly revealing snippet:
Curiously enough, not a single professor from the Wharton School, one of the most prestigious business schools of the US, which is part of the University of Pennsylvania, was a signatory to this letter.
“Islam has always been part of our America family.”
President Barack Hussain Obama
Oh, really? I do not recollect presence of any Muslim in 1776 or even during Civil war. I wonder where does President Obama’s history of USA starts?
If Islam is part of the USA family, then this surely is going to be a dysfunctional family at best.
Civil and Uncivil Societies – By Ratan Sharda
I have been rather intrigued by the term ‘Civil Society’. I had a long argument with a dear friend of mine, a leading light in this ‘Civil Society’ movement. By calling citizen activists (the right word, perhaps), as civil society, aren’t we keeping out a large part of the society which is not ‘civil’ or rather which is ‘uncivil’ – probably with low education, low income, average life style, unaware of civilized society’s obsession with brands etc. etc. My friend explained to me, it is not so but this is the universally accepted nomenclature for citizen activists. But, contrast between the media coverage and deep sighs of ‘beautiful people’ at a Baba running amok brought out the difference between perceived ‘civil society’ and our majority ‘uncivil’ society of ‘average boring village and town and suburban dwellers.
Contrast the crowds that thronged media elevated Anna Hazare fest. Don’t get me wrong. With all due respect to the veteran crusader, the crowds were not as big as what Baba Ramdev brought in across Bharat. But, media was so taken in by presence of English speaking ‘beautiful people’ in their designer clothes and with it attitude, just right for good news sound bites, that it helped create ‘Brand Anna’ as next only to Gandhi ji. I am not even suggesting that ‘civil society’ (as I read this tag) should not be on road. By all means, they must come out roads, they can provide the requisite leadership and come out with good ideas.
I know of wonderful work done by Anna and I respect him a lot. But, the point I am driving home is not about personalities of Anna or Baba. But, rather the way they are presented to us by news coverage because of the crowds they attract. The followers of Baba who came from all over Bharat were a study in contrast. Rustic villagers, small town residents, or coming from distant suburbs of Delhi or Mumbai etc. They are the worst sufferers from tyranny of bureaucracy at lower level in their daily dealings and have no where with alls to pay their way through their chicanery. They came on faith that Baba will fight the mighty corrupt and they came to support this. So, there is hardly any coverage of the participants of this agitation. They can’t speak English, they dont come pretty on camera, so just keep camera on Baba – he makes colourful copy! Witness the way Baba Ramdev is harangued by media and the kid glove treatment Anna Hazare gets.
Now, you will understand why I am against the word ‘civil society’.
Was this contrast in two societies of India i.e. Bharat that flummoxed media and powers that be? When Congress flexed its police muscles, it calculated that these ordinary folks will not get sympathy and colourful coverage from media and will go home tails between legs. It forgot that this is the common ‘uncivil society’ that votes with its feet and not the beautiful ‘civil society’. Now, that shit has hit the fan, let us see this ‘police state’ mentality haunt them in coming months.
What I have noted above, does not at all take away the credit from media for standing up against corruption, giving live coverage to attack on innocent citizens in the dead of night. I am just pointing out the difference in approach to the two agitations. And making readers aware of this phenomenon of common man fight against corruption and civil society’s fight against corruption. The gap between Bharat and India as cliche goes, and our elite society’s perceptions.
Report: Texas charter school network awarded most contracts to Turkish-owned businesses
By Liz Goodwin | The Lookout – 9 minutes ago
A rapidly expanding charter school movement in Texas that educates 16,000 kids awards almost all of its pricey contracting jobs to Turkish-owned businesses, The New York Times reports.
The 33 Harmony schools–which emphasize math and science–receive $100 million in taxpayer funds each year, and are intertwined with followers of the moderate Islamic preacher Fethullah Gulen. The Times describes the Gulen movement as “a loose network of several million followers of Mr. Gulen, who preaches the need to embrace modernity in a peace-loving, ecumenical version of Islam.”
The Harmony schools have awarded 35 contracts to outside businesses worth $82 million since 2009, the Times reports, with all but three going to Turkish-owned enterprises. In one instance, Harmony awarded a contract to a Gulen-affiliated business priced hundreds of thousands of dollars higher than the contracts offered by competitors. Several business owners told the Times they weren’t told why their cheaper bids were rejected.
The Times says its findings raise questions about whether “the schools are using taxpayer dollars to benefit the Gulen movement—by giving business to Gulen followers, or through financial arrangements with local foundations that promote Gulen teachings and Turkish culture.” The schools themselves do not teach religion to their diverse student bodies, and school officials told the Times that contracts were awarded by merit as state law demands.
Last year, USA Today wrote that nationally about 35,000 students attend Turkish-affiliated charter schools, and that virtually all of them “have opened or operate with the aid of Gulen-inspired ‘dialogue’ groups, local nonprofits that promote Turkish culture.” Most of the schools are high-performing, with students scoring well on state standardized tests.
The schools have faced controversy in the past for recruiting hundreds of teachers from Turkey to teach on H1-B visas, which are granted when employers can’t find Americans with specific skills for a job. Most of the Texas school’s 33 principals are Turkish men. Charter schools–which are embraced by the bipartisan education reform movement–are publicly financed, but have more leeway than public schools are granted to experiment with different curricula and teaching techniques.